On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Isarra Yos <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/09/14 22:06, Pete Forsyth wrote: > >> >> Personally, I have no problem with the existence of the conference, but I >> find its name alienating. Not everyone agrees with that assessment, but >> clearly some others in this thread do. >> > > What Pete said. > > We could go into issues with the exclusionary nature itself, such as that > it would exclude representatives of groups who ran into trouble becoming > official - despite such a conference likely being one of the best venues > for them to bring up and discuss with relevant others how to actually > address or resolve that trouble that excluded them in the first place... > > ...but that sort of thing is much harder to resolve/address. The name, at > least, is simple, and should also make a lot of the other problems less > glaring in the process. > > Assuming the issue of the name is the sticking point ... What about the Wikimedia Meta-Conference? Or Meta-Wikimedia Conference? Or MetaWiki Conference? It's more about the organisations in the background than keep the movement going. It doesn't seem (from my second-hand knowledge of the event) that a regular editor would get a lot out of it? Regards, Charles (User:Chuq) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
